In October
1912, the Balkan Alliance – Serbia, Montenegro, Bulgaria and Greece – declared
war on the Ottoman Empire. At its conclusion in 1913, the Ottomans’ presence in
Europe was reduced to a bridgehead in Thrace. To the victors, this was the
capstone of their centuries-long struggle for freedom from Ottoman yoke. To the
great European powers, however, it was a catastrophe that threatened their
imperial plans.

The Great Game

For most
of the 19th century, European powers jockeyed for control over the
crumbling Ottoman Empire. Though it had been in constant retreat since the
failed second siege of
Vienna (1683), the Ottomans managed to carry on largely because any one
power that managed to challenge them saw the others sabotage the effort. For
example, Britain and France had long been rivals, but joined forces in 1853 to help the Turks
fight off Russia. It all tied into the “Great Game” between
Britain and Russia for control of central Asia; at no cost was Russia to be
allowed a warm-water port, such as Constantinople (Istanbul).

Austria’s
House of Habsburg had once ruled most of
Europe; but the 19th century was not kind to them: Napoleon
abolished their Holy Roman Empire, while the Italian and German unification
wars ended their influence over northern Italy and southern German lands. In
1867, Vienna had to make a deal
with the Magyars to retain its hold on Hungary. By 1878, its only avenue of
expansion was southwest, into Ottoman-held lands.

This was
troublesome for two reasons: German-speaking Austrians already
lorded over millions of disaffected Slavs, and the Balkans was inhabited by
more of them; furthermore, those Slavs were mostly Orthodox Christians, while the Habsburg Empire had always been
staunchly Catholic.

Sultan’s Hammer, Pope’s Anvil

Since
the Great
Schism of 1054, the Balkans had been a battlefield between the Orthodox
East – loyal to the Patriarch in Constantinople – and the Catholic
West, loyal to the Bishop of Rome. The enmity carried over into the Crusades,
as Catholic knights eventually sacked Constantinople (1204) when their efforts
against the Muslims began to falter. The weakened Byzantium fell to the Ottoman
Turks in the early 1300s (Constantinople fell in 1453), and the Orthodox
kingdoms of the Balkans followed suit. Only then did the Turks come into
contact with Catholic Europe.

Yet the
centuries of Habsburg struggle against the Ottoman invaders did nothing to stop
the crusading against the “schismatics” of Bosnia, Serbia, Wallachia, Transylvania… Though Austrians and Hungarians duly embraced
the aid of Orthodox rebels every time the Ottoman hordes approached, they went
right back to forcing them into Catholicism as soon as the war would end.

Less Than Kind Kin

Just as
those who embraced Islam made for the cruelest
oppressors of their remaining Christian kin (with a handful of very notable
exceptions),
so did the Catholics converted through Austro-Hungarian pressure turn to hatred
against their Orthodox roots. In the 19th century in particular,
once the Principality of Serbia successfully wrested a modicum of liberty from
the Sultans, Vienna encouraged an
anti-Serb, Catholic identity amongst its southern Slavs. After going through Illyrian and Yugoslav
phases, this identity was eventually shaped by by Ante Starcevic,
a vicious anti-Serb and anti-Semite, and labeled Croatian.

For two
centuries, the Orthodox subjects of the Habsburgs were concentrated along the Military Frontier.
The 1867 arrangement
foisted them on Hungary. But in 1878,
Austria occupied Bosnia and Herzegovina, Ottoman provinces where a Muslim
minority ruled a mostly Orthodox peasantry. A small Catholic
community was soon reinforced by immigrants from all over the Empire,
while special arrangements were made for the Muslims. The worst off were the
Orthodox Serbs, who sought union with their free brethren in the east. After
Austria annexed the occupied territories in 1908, the discontent turned to violence.

From Scutari to Sarajevo

One of
the reasons Austria was able to get away with the annexation was that in 1905,
Russia suffered a humiliating defeat in a war with Japan, losing its entire
Navy in the process. The revolution that
followed severely weakened the Tsar, temporarily abolishing his autocracy.

By 1912, however, Russia had regained some of its strength, and was backing the Balkans Alliance
in its war on the Turks. The treaties that bound the Orthodox Christian allies
together referred to the Tsar of Russia as the supreme arbiter of any disputes.
So once the Allies unexpectedly crushed the Ottoman armies, Western powers
panicked.

Austria led the charge, threatening war on Serbia unless its forces evacuated Scutari and
allowed the establishment of an independent Albanian state. Italy also
supported the creation of Albania, as part of its imperial dreams for the
Mediterranean. British and Italian gunboats sailed to Scutari to force the
issue – which is interesting, because London was technically allied with
Russia at the time.

Unwilling to risk war with Austria, Serbia and Montenegro withdrew – but kept
territory originally promised to Bulgaria as compensation. While the peace
talks in London were still ongoing, Austria persuaded Bulgaria to turn on the
other allies, resulting in the Second Balkan War of
1913.

Emerging victorious, Serbia set to consolidate its gains and recover from the year-long conflict. Austria responded by turning up the
pressure: organizing a military exercise in Bosnia, near the Serbian border.
Heir to the throne, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, reviewed the troops and then
visited Sarajevo, on the very day the Serbs
commemorated their 1389
battle with the Turks. One of the assassins out to kill him failed; the
third-string backup got lucky. The rest is history.

Redirecting Blame

Four years later, in Versailles, the bloodied and bitter Britain and France imposed
an official history blaming Germany for what was then called the “Great
War.” Austria-Hungary, which actually used the Sarajevo incident as the
long-sought pretext to invade Serbia, was not mentioned; it had dissolved by
then.

This official
history was projection; by blaming
Germany, Britain and France were covering up their own belligerence. But in
seeking to redress the obvious injustice, subsequent historians engaged in more projection. Unwilling to actually
blame the victors, they shifted to a safer target: Russia – and by proxy,
Serbia. Paris and London’s alliance with St. Petersburg was one of convenience,
and even that was gone by 1918, when Bolshevik revolutionaries massacred the
royal family, created the Soviet Union, and signed a separate peace with the
Kaiser.

The typical revisionist narrative, only strengthened by the Cold War, thus chooses
to blame Russia for Europe’s
suicide: if only the Tsar had not come to the aid of “terrorist”
Serbia, Austria would have crushed the tiny country within weeks, and Europe
could have stayed in the Belle
Epoque forever.

Except that is all bovine excrement. It basically amounts to blaming the archetypical
“Other” – the Orthodox Russians and Serbs, specifically – for the actions
of (Catholic and Protestant) Europe.

Scores to Settle

Berlin did not have to give Vienna a blank check, but it did. London did not have to
get involved in the war over Belgium – as Niall Ferguson compellingly
argued – but it did. France did not have to fight, but it chose to in order
to avenge 1871. Austria-Hungary
had many other options, but it chose a war of annihilation out of mistaken
belief it would be short and victorious.

It can certainly be argued that Serbia represented a “mortal danger” to the Habsburg
monarchy, but not because of its territorial ambitions, but because it
represented an idea: that Slavs could have a free country of their own,
rather than be ruled from of Vienna or Budapest. Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia
emerged as the result of that idea. Both were later singled out for
vengeance by Hitler, an Austrian-born German.

Note that it was Wilhelmine Germany that unleashed the Bolsheviks on the world, by sending Lenin to Russia in hopes
he’d foment enough unrest to knock it out of the war. Fear of Communism is what
influenced President Hindenburg to make a coalition with the Nazis and appoint
Hitler Chancellor in 1933. When Hitler’s charred corpse was found outside his
bunker in May 1945, it was a fitting end to the chain of events that began with
a sealed train from Zurich in 1917.

Princip’s Haunting Shade

Also fitting is that the assassin who shot Archduke Franz Ferdinand was named
Gavrilo Princip (principle). Imprisoned in Terezin – the same stockade the
Nazis would later use to torture the Jewish inmates of their “Paradise
Ghetto” – Princip had scratched into the walls of his cell the following
verse: “Our shades shall walk in Vienna, wandering the courts and haunting the
lords.”

Nearly a hundred years since his act of defiance was used by Austria as a pretext for
pan-European carnage, Princip’s shade still haunts the West. Washington, Berlin
and Brussels are still treating Russia as the “Other,” while trying to do to
Serbia what Austria-Hungary failed in 1914: break
it so that nothing of her heretical desire for liberty remains. So their
imperial dreams can be safe.

It won’t work. Never has and never will. But those who would not learn from history are
doomed to repeat it.

Nebojsha, reading this, I hoped that you will do the right thing and mention the fate of the Macedonians in the Balkan wars of 1912-1913. No such thing. At least in that way the readers could have seen that even Orthodox Christians don't have a problem fighting among themselves as long as that's done for "king and country". Don't do to others what you don't want done unto you… and some such.

MichaelKenny

The potted history lesson is reasonably accurate but it doesn't support the umteenth repetition of the author's "1914 all over again" thesis. Indeed, the author's reasoning is so typically marxist that it stands out like a sore thumb on this website. The marxists don't see events as linear. They see existence as a sort of merry-go-round, in which the same events have been repeating themselves over and over again since the dawn of time and will continue to do so until the end of time. That illogical premise is one of the reasons why marxism turned out to be such a dismal failure. And, of course, when things don't work out as their model predicts, then it just has to be (yet another!) plot by those dastardly imperialists. Conclusions based on illogical premises will themselves be illogical and no amount of huffing and puffing by this or any other author will change that.

The Threeof Spades

"this author" must be a reference to yourself. Since you regard Marxist view of events as linear and incorrect, presumably the correct views are circular. Undoubtedly you consider your views to be correct, as they are, beyond any reasonable doubt, circular – you show up every two weeks. Even when Mr. Malich's theme does not support your cliche you show up. Repeating your diatribe every two weeks is unlikely to lend it any intellectual heft.

starr

Only Marxist's see events repeating. Gee that should come as a surprise to all the Hindu's, Buddhist's, Jew's and many many others born thousands of years before Marx! Don't you ever get tired of being spectacularly wrong every time!

Bianca

This is the most ignorant yet. Let us see, author's reasoning is typically marxist, as Marxists do not see things as linear. Marxists see things are merry-go-round — and this is why it turned to be such a DISMAL failure! Brilliant! You know nothing of Marxism, and have the courage to actually display your ignorance! Actually, Bernanke may have to read up on Karl Marx, to learn a thing of two. His laws of economics and finance are not bad — after all these years. And the dialectics must be a new concept to you, since you think events are always linear, you must believe the earth is flat. Oh my, your confusion based on confused premises are not illogical, but confused, and try as you may to elevate this to science — it only ends up being a bigger mess at the end, then when you started.

Rad

To Mr. Malic one question: I am Krayina Serb and consider this very important article which explains the essence of the problem in the Balkan and why things are now as they are and the roots of the problem. Does this article appear somewhere in Serbian language for my friends, but not as a 'Google translated'.
Thanks for your excellent work.

Not yet, but it will be available soon. Check my blog (sivisoko.blogspot.com) for the translation.

MvGuy

So again (happily) I just read and learn…. I don't take everything I read here as absolute fact.. Either in the article or the comments……. But I agree with Malik about Empire's obsession to crush Yugoslavia and Serbia to weaken Russia…. I at least have been to Constantinople, Yugoslavia and Serbia… The Year 1971….. as I hitched hiked back from India to Paris…… only to be brutalized by the Paris police. My Czech wife has started to hector me to forget about accepting Malik 's history and read Balkan Ghosts. She presciently predicted the break-up of Yugoslavia days after the demise of the USSR……….. just as I predicted the USSR would LOSE there, the very DAY they invaded Afghanistan..

Bianca

Balkan Ghosts — Rebecca West he is not. Better to read Rebecca West.

eric siverson

If we going for predictions . True they have tried to weaken Russia by crushing Yugoslavia . It did not work out so well . Russia right now is much more powerfull than the Soviet Union ever was . Putin had phenominal success at reviving Russia religiously , economicaly and militarly during his first term . I think Russia and even China would love to find a place where they could demendstrate some of their new technology on a NATO battlefield . Of course they would like to find a place where world oppinion would favor their actions . I think this place might be pretty easy to find . considering all the many conflicts NATO rushes into . In 1999 when NATO was bombing Yugoslavia Yelsin's Russia was bankrupt broke and to weak to fight . The Russian people are proud of their government now . Russia has gradually gotten more assertive . On this new missle defense station in Chekoslvokia , Russia not only says they dont want it , now they say if you build it we will blow it up . The Chech people don't want it either , its the United States that wants it . I think Russia and China would like to rehabilitate their credability with the world for allowing NATO to destroy Yugoslavia .

Visitor

Imperial and racist policies of the "civilized" world and religious fanatics from "savages" are the cause of all the human suffering, which continues to this day.

Bianca

When the "civilized" world hits you and squeezes you, you will turn into a fanatic — religious or otherwise. This is the world od weak fighting with the strong, the world od "terrrorists' or "desperados". Most people think that they cannot be turned into fanatical savages given the right inducements. How wrong they are.

eric siverson

i believe you

jason

Gavrilo Princip faced the imperial power and stated with defiance "We Slavs shall never be slaves". His act shaped the 20th century and continues its influence into the 21st century.

Bianca

And he was just a high school student. Because he was a minor, he was not executed. But somehow died very shortly afterwards in prison.

Who started raising ethnic flames Yougo?
Was it Turks or was it Germans in 1988?

3oka

Germans as usual.

Why do you ask, the article hurts your sensible feelings, eh?

Winston Smith

No it was The Empire directly, tthe Germans were only the client state.

It is a horror story.

The World War II collaborators with Hitler were allowed to change sides by Allan Dulles and brought out and settled in the US. andCcanada for just such a purpose.

It is called The Ratlines. research The Ratlines.

These organisations were reactivated in 1991 for just this purpose.

The prosecution rests its case.

MoT

Without "help" Mr. Lenin and his murderous crew would have floundered about and justly been forgotten. The end result was the deaths of tens of millions. The simple act of murdering Ferdinand was likewise escalated into hell on earth all again by people who had limited goals yet there again aided and abetted by those with bigger fish to fry. Wheels within murdering wheels.

Nearly a hundred years since his act of defiance was used by Austria as a pretext for pan-European carnage, Princip’s shade still haunts the West. Washington, Berlin and Brussels are still treating Russia as the “Other,” while trying to do to Serbia what Austria-Hungary failed in 1914: break it so that nothing of her heretical desire for liberty remains. So their imperial dreams can be safe.

Who dreams this? Not me or you but our man-boy Malic. But who is this Malic who flees Bosnia after Dayton peace and becomes amateur historian? As we say, a small #@$%^ in big package.

Nikkolas

I guess the history is the part you have skipped in school. I hope you have attended big brakes over the lunch time..at least. Fleeing you say Bosnia ( the name of Country is Bosnia and Herzegovina ..2 parts ) is to have a normal future.I am not sure he is right place but is good start.
and yes as much we have Apple phone today old history has never changes just a dress code.

TheThreeofSpades

As we say, a small #@$%^ in big package.
Uh, Huh! Is that what you say?
I would've never guessed it.
Thanks for telling us.

MacedoniaisBulgaria

>>Unwilling to risk war with Austria, Serbia and Montenegro withdrew – but kept territory originally promised to Bulgaria as compensation.<<<

I'm shocked! A Serb admitting that Bulgaria was wronged in 1st Balkan War, this happens once in a lifetime.

That wasn't the first time Serbia served Austria against Bulgaria, when Austrians took Bosnia they told Serbia to invade Bulgaria. Serbian Tsar claimed he was going to help the Bulgarians against the Turks but once across the border turned it into invasion, backstabbing the Bulgarians, creating the Serbo-Bulgarian war of 1885. Since that happened, Empire has managed to instill a Serbian craving for Bulgarian lands that has resulted in a long mistrust Bulgarians have had with Serbia.

It's this misguided Serbian nationalism that they think Macedonia can be theirs or that they somehow can keep it from Bulgaria. The church, the heroes, the songs, struggles are the same as in Macedonia and Bulgaria. Arguing over the same issues, Serbia is outside of all this yet has the crazy idea that Macedonia somehow has anything to do with them. "Macedonian language" is termed south-EAST slavic, same as Bulgarian, while Serbian is south-WEST slavic language.

Historically Macedonia has been longest under Bulgarian rule, it was the seat of the church and the Tsars. Briefly it belonged to Serbia but it was under Bulgarian influence (marriage) and the 1st Serbian patriarchy was created n recognized by the Bulgarian church.

One cannot simply claim land lost centuries ago like Seselj does, because Belgrad was Bulgarian first and had it longer (and we named it too), you don't see us claiming half of Serbia today? Land can only be claimed where there's a significant population of ones nation, and Serbia has what? 5000 Serbs in Macedonia out of a population of 2 million? And that's Serbs that came after ww2.

Speaking about claiming lands, the western outlands, Bulgarian majority territory was simply given to Serbia after ww1 by Empire, and to this day refuses to give the theft back. How is this any different than Empire giving Kosovo to the Albanians? Hypocrisy at its finest. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_Outlands

Aleksandar

Thank you for making exactly my point with this comment of yours. Again (not surprising when reading your nick-name here) you are ignoring the Macedonians (which are not Bulgarians of course, but that's another issue altogether). The kind of reasoning you display is a perfect example for the uninformed reader why Macedonia continues to be the "apple of discord" between Serbia (to a less extrent lately), Bulgaria, Greece and Albania – Kosovo (more and more so) even after 100 (!) years after the balkan wars. This being an anti war site, it is good to see that we have a long way to go in defusing the "balkan powder keg" i.e. Macedonia. And having neighbours like these doesn't help one bit. Stuck firmly in the 19 century, you and your frinds-by-nationalism still refuse to admit that the Macedonians are a separate nation, let alone have a civilized discourse with them, or god forbid, recognize that in your respective countries there is a Macedonan minority (usually leftover after a meticolously executed ethnic cleansing campaigns at the times of the balkan wars and beyond). Talk about schisms in one's psyche…

Todor Petrov, the chair of the "World Macedonian Congress", an extremist FYROM NGO, has come up with a propaganda article against Bulgaria that appears borderline insane. Photo by Vecer

There are no Bulgarians, only "Macedonians", in Bulgaria, according to a propaganda article in a Macedonian newspaper that appears to stretch the boundaries of sanity.

The article in the Macedonian daily "Vecer", entitled "There Is Anything But Bulgarians in Bulgaria", is authored by Todor Petrov, the chairman of the so called "World Macedonian Congress", an ultranationalist Macedonian NGO, close to the ruling Macedonian party VMRO-DPMNE of Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski.

"Only the gypsies and the Turks in Bulgaria are not Macedonians. The question is not whether the Macedonians in Macedonia are Bulgarians but whether there are Bulgarians in Bulgaria without Macedonian roots," states the highly perplexing text of Todor Petrov.

The author even goes on to suggest that Bulgaria needs to have "ethnic Macedonians" in order "to keep the demographic balance in time and space".

Juggling "historical facts" apparently invented by the "Skopje historians" to justify the creation of a Macedonian nation by Communist Yugoslavia, Petrov states that the Balkan Peninsula should be called "the Macedonian Peninsula", and that the Macedonians from FYROM, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, must help the people "on the other side of the border" because they are apparently deluded that they are Bulgarians, and because they are "our (Macedonian) people".

The aggressive ultranationalist propaganda article by Todor Petrov, whose name paradoxically appears to bear the tradiotnal Bulgarian suffix "-ov", unlike the suffix "ovski" introduced by communist Yugoslavia to root out the Bulgarian sounding of the families names in the region of Macedonia, is of the sort that often appears in the Macedonian press, and is in line with Skopje's policies towards Bulgaria in the past 20 years which feature nationalist propaganda moves by FYROM that periodically exacerbate the bilateral relations.

For example, in 2011, Macedonia's Foreign Minister Nikola Poposki was ultimately forced to refute a propaganda piece published in August 2011 by Macedonian newspaper Dnevnik stating that some 750 000 "ethnic Macedonians" live in Bulgaria, according to figures provided from the Foreign Ministry in Skopje.

The "World Macedonian Congress", among its mind-boggling statements, is famous for creating the "Macedonian Prayer", written by Niche Dimovski, its Vice President, aired in a 9 minute video on Macedonian Radio-Television (the public broadcasting organization of the Republic of Macedonia), in which the God is presented calling the people of the Republic of Macedonia "the oldest nation on Earth" and progenitors of the "white race" who are described as "Macedonoids" in opposition to "Negroids" and "Mongoloids".

Since the early Middle Ages, all the way to the first half of the 20th century, Macedonia and its Slavic population were considered part of the Bulgarian nation not just by Bulgaria but also by its neighbors and the international community. This is why from its National Liberation in 1878 till 1944 Bulgaria waged five wars attempting to unite all of the Bulgarian-populated lands in the Balkans, including Macedonia – after the San Stefano Treaty of March 1878 providing one state for almost all Bulgarian-populated regions was revised three months later by the European Great Powers in the Treaty of Berlin leaving the regions of Thrace and Macedonia out of Bulgaria.

After both World War I and World War II, however, Serbia/Yugoslavia kept control of 40% of the territory of the geographic and historical region of Macedonia, the so called Vardar Macedonia (which in 1991 became the Republic of Macedonia), Greece retained about 50% of the region – the so called Aegean Macedonia, while only 10% of the region – the so called Pirin Macedonia – remained in Bulgaria.

MacedoniaisBulgaria

The foundations of the contemporary Macedonian nation were laid in 1943-44 by Yugoslavia's communists at a special congress that also proclaimed the creation of a Macedonian language and a Macedonian alphabet designed to differentiate the dialects spoken in the region of Macedonia from the Bulgarian language and to underline the creation of a distinct Macedonian national identity.

The so called question about the perceived Macedonian minority in Bulgaria exists since the late 1940s when the dictators of the Soviet Union and communist Yugoslavia – Joseph Stalin and Josip Broz Tito – attempted to arrange the post-World War II order on the Balkans through the creation of a Balkan federation between Bulgaria and Yugoslavia.

One of the provisions of this state engineering project of the two notorious communist dictators was the creation of a Macedonian republic within the future federation. For that to happen, the leadership of communist Bulgaria had to cede Pirin Macedonia to Yugoslavia in exchange for the territories of the so called Western Outlands (the towns of Tsaribrod (Dimitrovgrad) and Bosilegrad where the recognized Bulgarian minority in Serbia lives today).

This provision was accepted unconditionally by the Bulgarian communist leader Georgi Dimitrov who acted under direct orders from Stalin. As a result, in the late 1940s, the Bulgarian Communist Party undertook an unprecedented campaign to force its own population in the Pirin Region (today's Blagoevgrad District in Southwest Bulgaria) to change its Bulgarian nationality and identity into the newly invented Macedonian one, and the official census figures out of the blue recorded that 250 000 Macedonians living in Bulgaria.

The campaign to force the people of the Blagoevgrad District to become "Macedonians" was dropped by the Bulgarian Communist Party after the entire project for a Balkan federation between Bulgaria and Yugoslavia was killed with the falling out between Stalin and Tito in 1948-49 – a rift that had wide repercussions for Europe during the entire Cold War period. This left the population of Southwest Bulgaria – which was harassed by its own government on orders from Moscow – to shake off the imagined ethnic Macedonian identity imposed on it.

Ever since, however, the authorities in Skopje whose legitimacy relies primarily on the doctrine described by the Bulgarian historians as "macedonianism", i.e. the distinct national identity of the Slavic population of the region of Macedonia, have resurfaced claims of "hundreds of thousands of ethnic Macedonians" living in Bulgaria under some sort of "brutal oppression." Macedonian media cite as evidence for such claims statements by the so called ethnic Macedonian party "OMO Ilinden-Pirin", whose members according to publications in the Bulgarian media are paid from Skopje and Belgrade to declare themselves as "Macedonians."

The provocations in the Macedonian media on the "question" of "ethnic Macedonians" abroad seem to be in line with last year's construction of monuments in Skopje of Alexander the Great and the medieval Bulgarian Tsar Samuil, both of which are deemed to be great Macedonians by the government of Macedonian Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski and his party VMRO-DPMNE – a move that caused anger in Greece, ridicule in Bulgaria, and criticism by the European Commission.

Some 50 000 Macedonians have granted Bulgarian citizenship in the past decade, and that the figure has seen a staggering increase in the past couple of years, as many Macedonians are, in the worlds of Bulgarian historian, ex Diaspora Minister and current head of the National History Museum, Bozhidar Dimitrov, returning to their "Bulgarian roots."

As of 2010, it is much easier for Macedonians to get Bulgarian citizenship because the Bulgarian authorities no longer ask them to provide a document of Bulgarian origin – which is usually some sort of a church or municipal certificate from the time of their grandparents; instead, for the purposes of granting citizenship, the Bulgarian state has switched to assuming that all Macedonians are of Bulgarian origin.

Unlike Greece, which gets enraged by FYROM's moves toying with the cultural heritage from the Antiquity period and is tangled with Macedonia in the notorious name dispute, Bulgaria's governments traditionally react to propaganda fits by Skopje with disregard, while the general public in Bulgaria accepts them with ridicule. To the extent that Bulgaria has made any claims towards Macedonia, those have boiled down to the refusal to allow Skopje to hijack Bulgaria's historical heritage from the Middle Ages and the 19th century Revival Period.

Bulgaria was the first sovereign nation to recognize the independence of the Republic of Macedonia in 1992.

MacedoniaisBulgaria

Where are are the "thracian" and "dobrudjan" nations? Is it because FYROM was under Yugoslavia, away from Bulgaria that Macedonism was more successful? I dare say so yes. Just look at ex-Yugoslavia, from Serbo-Croatian language to Serbian, Bosnian, Croatian and to todays brainfarts "Vojvodinian" and "Montenegrin" languages n "seperate nations". That whole ex-Yugoslav zone is a giant experiment, it's defragmentating in a way that nobody else does in the rest of the Balkans. Without Yugoslavia, Macedonism wouldn't exist.

More about the Balkan Federation,

—

The Bulgarian Communist Party was compelled by Joseph Stalin to accept the formation of Macedonian, Thracian and Dobrujan nations in order to include those new separate states in the Balkan Communist Federation. Later even a resolution of the Balkan Communist Federation for the recognition of a Macedonian ethnicity was issued on January 7, 1934, by the Balkan Secretariat of the Comintern. It was accepted by the Political Secretariat in Moscow on January 11, 1934, and approved by the Executive Committee of the Comintern.

The Communist Party of Greece (KKE) delegate Nikolaos Sargologos signed the motion without central authorisation; instead of returning to Athens, he emigrated to the United States. The KKE political organ and newspaper, Rizospastis, was against the motion because it saw it as good for BCP in Bulgaria but disastrous for the KKE in Greece. The KKE found the BCF's position on Macedonia difficult but briefly went along with it. In June 1924, at its 5th meeting, it recognised "the Macedonian people" and in December 1924, it endorsed the motion for "a united and independent Macedonia and a united and independent Thrace" with the perspective of entering into a union within a Balkan federation "against the national and social yoke of the Greek and Bulgarian bourgeoisie".

nedley416

Wow, your skill at copying and pasting other people's articles is a sight to behold!

Frank

As a Macedonian myself it I have seen it all before my be in ten years when this person grows up he or she can hopefully see the absurdity and immaturity of it all

I sure dame well don’t have to prove anything either

MacedoniaisBulgaria

Keep building stupid statues of Alexander the Great, the whole world is laughing at you.

Aleksandar

QED.

Guest

America was founded by "schismatics." It hasn't stopped hoardes of Catholics from immigrating there and overwhemling the founding stock.

Winston Smith

I am not a Marxist.

This is an excellent article.

As Malic says this is all Projection.

Also it is about the Russians and the Orthodox Slavs as "The Other".

I have long argued the West just cannot cope with the orthodox church and worst still the Cyrillic alphabet.

Iliya Pavlovich

Compared to how little is known, researched and written on this topic this is a great contribution, I never said it was flawless. As far as Macedonia, Taiwan, Zimbabwe and Swaziland – I thougfht that those were slightly irrelevant to this main topic.

Aleksandar

Maybe so, but Macedonia is in the relevant region and exemplifies the duplicity of the relationships in the region – the younger Balkan states demand that they be treated with respect, but when the time comes that they treat other people in the same manner, strangely they turn a blind eye to such trivialities…

True, Taiwan, Zimbabwe and Swaziland are a bit irrelevant to this main topic.

Not sure if this was really "duplicity" at all, though. Having just emerged from a trade war with Austria-Hungary, Serbia's leadership was keen to secure a seaport. Austria and Germany wanted to prevent this at all cost – while the UK and Italy had its own agendas as well – hence the creation of Albania (geopolitical currency then as now – none of the powers involved could care less about the actual Albanians). So Serbia sought an alternate route down the Vardar valley and Salonika. The residents of the area were embraced as "Old Serbia" and offered integration.

Was this any better than what Bulgarians or Greeks did? Probably not. Now, I've had discussions about the Macedonian identity before; whether it existed in a coherent form prior to the Balkans Wars or not, it developed in its current form in Communist Yugoslavia, and exclusively in the territory Serbia won in 1913.

Greeks and Bulgarians (see the commenter above) hardly recognize Macedonians as a nation or Macedonia as a state – unlike most Serbs – yet it's the Serbs who get singled out for criticism. Easy to beat up on the Empire's designated villain, I suppose. Meanwhile, a third of Macedonia is UCK-controlled no-go zone, while the other half is busily getting Bulgarian citizenship. But hey, it's somehow the Serbs' fault.

Aleksandar

Nebojsa, I agree with what you say in the last paragraph above. I never blamed the Serbians. The Bulgarians respond to this by the ridiculous claim that the Macedonian nation was created by Serbia as the greater plan of weakening Bulgaria, and on and on it goes…

True, the current Macedonian state developed in the Serbian part of Macedonia. I propose that that happened because Yugoslavia was a federal state, and the change of power to the side of the communists enabled the Macedonians to create their state. This could happen in Bulgaria and Greece too, but the powers that be had other plans (no communism was a no-no in Greece and Bulgaria was in the Soviet domain).

As for the Macedonian identity before the Balkan wars, I claim that it did exist, and there are written accounts supporting this claim. If the Macedonians had their statehood established at the time others in the Balkans did, by 1913 it would have certainly been more "coherent", but that was not to be. And, the punishment was partition. That is why I don't feel like celebrating the centennial of the Balkan wars.

John Peterson

Your articles are insightful and historically accurate. You understand both past history and the current
global agenda. I tip my hat to you! Those who call you "Marxist" prove that they know nothing about
Marxism! It's laughable! Keep up your excellent analysis- I look forward to your articles.

Iliya Pavlovich

Again (excluding other exotic geographical locations) this article IS mainly about SERBIA, their migrations and cultural/political developement. Why would anybody insist on including Macedonia?
Serbians and Macedonians feel a very strong kinship. Historically speaking one of the greatest Serbian rulers (Tzar Dusan the Great – silini) had his HQ in Macedonia proper and was the ruller of Serbs, Greeks and Macedonians. Where were you when that history class was taught? From the 2 dozen Macedonians I know, met and lived with more than a half declare themselves are Macedonians of Serbian origin. How about them apples? The entire "Macedonia issue" is simply a red herring or a curve ball infused into this aricle by artificial insemination to bring discor and find flaws. There is a lot more discord between the Catalans and Spaniard (or the Valons/Flemish Dutch and Belgians that can be equally brought up here but it just dosen't belong here and that's the end of Tutu – Hootsie conflicts. Cheers.

Aleksandar

Ilya, I hope that you don't really believe that I or anyone else would buy what you're trying to sell in this comment. The article is about the great games being played in the Balkans (Serbia specifically) by the Balkan nations being used as pawns for the greater game of their imperial overlords. And, most of that game includes Macedonia and the Macedonians. My reaction was precisely provoked by that fact, namely that they are not mentioned at all in the article. I am trying to convey the message that even though that they did not have a state at that time, they did exist as people of distinct ethnicity and that fact should be acknowledged. Anything else is just rehashing of old nationalism.

I believe you that you have met people who claim to be Macedonians of Serbian origin. There are also ones who claim to be of Bulgarian origin, or Macedonian Greeks. They probably know what those identifiers mean precisely. But, there are Macedonians as such, with no additional identifiers, and it seems to me that you are trying to forget that they exist, even today.

Iliya Pavlovich

Aleksandar, what is it that you (or I are) trying to sell? Don't flatter yourself and focus only on he key points of the article. The injustices are an integral part of the world we live in. Serbia lost (probably) more than any other nation on Earth and you are lamenting Macdonia? To what end? Are the Serbs those who conquered Maceodina with the Ottoman Turks or are the Serbs those who sent volunteers to free Macedonia in 1912? How much history do you really know, or have you been breast fead the toxic CNN like the rest of the world? Again Macedonia is not the key topic of ths article? What other non-topics would you like to include? The Hutus and the Tootsies? The Catalans and the Spanish? the Flemish and the Valons? The Irish and the English? All those conflicts existed – many still do – but have no bearing on this artice? Get it? (I doubt it).

Aleksandar

I comment mostly on the fate of the Macedonians, which you omit all along from your narrative.

Iliya Pavlovich

Aleksander why not the fate of the Native American Cherokee Indians? They too suffered a great deal. This article here (AND NOW) is on a completely different topic. The Greeks suffered even more and longer than the Serbians or the Macedonians but those are not discussed here. Vlad Tepes (Dracula – from the order of the dragons) was famous for having killed countless Turks and having them impailed along the roads he had taken – that too IS NOT THE TOPIC. What can be so hard to understand? The connection between Serbians and Macedonians (including the Greeks and the Roumanians have been based on strong bonds rooted in Christianity and royal intermarrigies for centuries. You point is totally baseless, foolish and makes you sound ignorant and unable to see the main thread of the entire text – in which I admit there are some ommissions, but nothing dreadful.

Iliya Pavlovich

No more replies to ignorant comments – if you're too blind to see – seek an ophtamologist, not me.

Nebojsa Malic left his home in Bosnia after the Dayton Accords and currently resides in the United States. During the Bosnian War he had exposure to diplomatic and media affairs in Sarajevo. As a historian who specializes in international relations and the Balkans, Malic has written numerous essays on the Kosovo War, Bosnia, and Serbian politics. His exclusive column for Antiwar.com debuted in November 2000.